Will Jersey City go way of Camden?: letter

High-rise buildings dot the Jersey City skyline but is the city skyline hiding a poor financial foundation? Journal file photo

During the 1990s, when the city was creating affordable housing, I questioned the fact that more children would be added to the school system, but the housing would not contribute to the Board of Education funding.

The city then said our school cost was fixed to $72 million and costs would not increase. But we now know that is not true; local taxpayers are paying over $100 million to the Board of Education, but those costs are still just a fraction of the total bill. The state still pays over 80 percent of the cost.

Yet we have citizens and state legislators who believe the Board of Education should be turned over to local control without interference of the state. Yet, there are no free rides, more control also means paying the full freight.

To illustrate this point, our state has allowed Board of Education taxes to destroy the property values of Loch Arbor here in New Jersey. This municipality of 200 residents is now paying over $2.1 million for 20 students, that comes to $100,000 per student. I suggest readers search YouTube stories "Loch Arbour faces largest taxes in the state history" and "Taxed-out Loch Arbour to merge with Allenhurst." I don't think Jersey City is more special than Loch Arbour so I am concerned about our funding source.

Many people throughout the state are tired of funding Abbot districts; especially since their own local school districts do not receive any additional state funding. And it is no secret our state has increased borrowing by nearly 700 percent in the last two decades. New Jersey has $38 billion in bond obligations and owes another $27 billion in pension obligations. Many residents want equal spending per pupil and have local taxpayers pick up the rest. If this were to happen then Jersey City would go bankrupt like Stockton, Calif., or lay off their regular police like Camden.